Hermann v. United States

S.D. New York

Hermann v. United States

141 F. 486, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4910

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York

DecidedJune 1, 1905

DocketNos. 3,524, 3,525, 3,526

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 141 F. 486 (Hermann v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hermann v. United States, 141 F. 486, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4910 (S.D.N.Y. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.

The merchandise in question is cloth claimed by the importer to be a manufacture of fur, of which fur is the component of chief value, and dutiable at 35 per cent, ad valorem under Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule N, par. 450, 30 Stat. 193 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1678]. The Board of General Appraisers, however, assessed the merchandise as articles of wearing apparel under paragraph 370, Schedule K, 30 Stat. 184 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1667], or as fur hats and forms for hats under paragraph 432, Schedule N, 30 Stat. 191 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1675].

Apparently the Board rested its decision chiefly on the ground that the protests were submitted by the importers to be decided on the record, and therefore were to be treated as defaulted. This claim of a default is not pressed on this appeal. An examination of the exhibits, in connection with the testimony taken on behalf of the importers as to the character of the cloth, establishes the fact that the classification contended for by them was correct.

The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

TOWNSEND, Circuit Judge.

The merchandise in question is cloth claimed by the importer to be a manufacture of fur, of which fur is the component of chief value, and dutiable at 35 per cent, ad valorem under Act July 24, 1897, c. 11, § 1, Schedule N, par. 450, 30 Stat. 193 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1678]. The Board of General Appraisers, however, assessed the merchandise as articles of wearing apparel under paragraph 370, Schedule K, 30 Stat. 184 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1667], or as fur hats and forms for hats under paragraph 432, Schedule N, 30 Stat. 191 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 1675].

Apparently the Board rested its decision chiefly on the ground that the protests were submitted by the importers to be decided on the record, and therefore were to be treated as defaulted. This claim of a default is not pressed on this appeal. An examination of the exhibits, in connection with the testimony taken on behalf of the importers as to the character of the cloth, establishes the fact that the classification contended for by them was correct.

The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

141 F. 486, 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hermann-v-united-states-nysd-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack